Cytomegalovirus disease is associated with higher all-cause mortality after lung transplantation despite extended antiviral prophylaxis

Pathogen-specific cell-mediated immunity to guide the management of cytomegalovirus in solid organ transplantation: state of the art clinical review

INTRODUCTION

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a common opportunistic infection after solid organ transplantation, with significant impact on morbidity and long-term survival. Despite advances in diagnostics and therapeutics, the management of CMV remains very challenging.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews emerging data on the clinical utility of laboratory assays that quantify cell-mediated immune responses to CMV. Observational studies have consistently demonstrated that a deficiency in pathogen-specific cell-mediated immunity is correlated with a heightened risk of primary, reactivation or recurrent CMV after transplantation. A limited number of interventional studies have recently investigated cell-mediated immune assays in guiding the prevention and treatment of CMV infection after solid organ transplantation.

EXPERT OPINION

The pathogenesis and outcome of CMV after solid organ transplantion reflect the interplay between viral replication and CMV-specific immune reconstitution. Research in CMV-specific cell-mediated immunity paved way for the development of several laboratory assays that may assist clinicians in predicting the risk of CMV after transplantation, individualize the approach to CMV disease prevention, guide the need and duration of treatment of CMV infection, and predict the risk of relapse after treatment. More interventional studies are needed to further solidify the role of cell-mediated immune assays in various clinical situations after transplantation.

Efficacy of valganciclovir prophylaxis in kidney transplant recipients following low-dose rituximab induction therapy: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Rituximab (RIT) induction therapy is widely used for desensitization against ABO-incompatible living-donor kidney transplants (KT). However, the efficacy of valganciclovir (VGCV) prophylaxis against cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease and infection in KT recipients (KTRs) following RIT induction remains unclear.

METHODS

The current multicenter retrospective study included 213 KTRs who received low-dose RIT induction between 1998 and 2021, across 6 facilities included in the Michinoku Renal Transplant Network (MRTN). VGCV dosage varied from 450 mg/day (twice weekly) to 900 mg/day (daily), with treatment durations of 3-12 months. The primary and secondary endpoints were the incidence of CMV disease and infection, respectively.

RESULTS

The incidence of CMV disease was significantly higher in the VGCV group (23.5%; 16 patients) than in the non-VGCV group (5.5%; 8 patients) (p < 0.01). The incidence of CMV infection was 54.5% (79 patients) in the non-VGCV group and 48.5% (33 patients) in the VGCV group, with no significant difference (p = 0.42). In the subgroup of CMV-seronegative KTRs receiving allografts from CMV-seropositive donors (CMV IgG (D + /R-)), 18 out of 24 KTRs received VGCV prophylaxis, of whom 10 (55.6%) developed CMV disease. Within this subgroup, only 4 KTRs received VGCV with the standard protocol (900 mg daily for 6 months), and none developed CMV disease.

CONCLUSION

Insufficient VGCV prophylaxis does not reduce the incidence of CMV disease in KTRs following low-dose RIT induction. Despite concerns about leukopenia due to RIT and VGCV, in KTRs with CMV IgG (D + /R-) serostatus, VGCV prophylaxis with a standard protocol may be advisable.

Use of letermovir for cytomegalovirus primary prophylaxis in lung transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a driver of negative outcomes after lung transplant (LTX) and primary prophylaxis (PPX) with valganciclovir (VGC) is standard-of-care. VGC is associated with myelosuppression, prompting interest in letermovir (LTV).

METHODS

Adults receiving LTX between April 1, 2015, and July 30, 2022, at our institution were evaluated. Patients were excluded if low CMV risk (D-/R-), survived <90 days post-LTX, or transferred care before PPX withdrawal. Primary outcomes were leukopenia (white blood cell count [WBC] ≤ 3.0 × 109/L), severe leukopenia (WBC ≤ 2.0 × 109/L), and neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count ≤ 1500 cells/µL) requiring granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (GCSF) on PPX. Secondary outcomes included breakthrough CMV infection and post-PPX CMV infection.

RESULTS

204 patients met inclusion criteria: 175 patients on VGC and 29 patients on LTV (after VGC conversion). Most patients received bilateral LTX (62.7%) with non-lymphocyte-depleting induction (96.6%) and moderate-risk serostatus (D+/R+, 48.5%). Patients transitioned from VGC to LTV after a mean of 178 days (SD 80.8 days) post-transplant. Patients on VGC experienced significantly more leukopenia (82.3% vs. 58.6%, p = 0.008), severe leukopenia (57.1% vs. 31.0%, p = 0.016), and neutropenia requiring GCSF (70.9% vs. 51.7%, p = 0.048). Breakthrough (5.7% vs. 3.4%, p = 0.955) and post-PPX (24.6% vs. 37.9%, p = 0.199) infections were similar. A subgroup analysis of patients with high-risk serostatus showed similar trends, though did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

In this single-center study, the incidence of leukopenia and neutropenia requiring GCSF were reduced with LTV compared to VGC. Breakthrough and post-PPX infections were not significantly different. This evidence suggests that LTV has comparable efficacy with reduced myelosuppression compared to VGC in LTX recipients, and may be an appropriate alternative for PPX.

Predictors of Cytomegalovirus Recurrence Following Cessation of Posttransplant Prophylaxis

INTRODUCTION

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is associated with a poor prognosis after lung transplantation, and donor and recipient CMV serostatus is a risk factor for reactivation. CMV prophylaxis is commonly administered in the first year following transplantation to reduce CMV infection; however, the risk factors for long-term reactivation remain unclear. We investigated the timing and risk factors of CMV infection after prophylactic administration.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective review of the institutional lung transplantation database from June 2014 to June 2022. Data on patient characteristics, pretransplantation laboratory values, postoperative outcomes, and CMV infection were collected. Donor CMV-IgG-positive and recipient CMV-IgG-negative groups were defined as the CMV mismatch group.

RESULTS

During the study period, 257 patients underwent lung transplantation and received a prophylactic dose of valganciclovir hydrochloride for up to 1 y. CMV infection was detected in 69 patients (26.8%): 40 of 203 (19.7%) in the non-CMV mismatch group and 29 of 54 (53.7%) in the CMV mismatch group (P < 0.001). CMV infection after prophylaxis occurred at a median of 425 and 455 d in the CMV mismatch and non-CMV mismatch groups, respectively (P = 0.07). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that preoperative albumin level (odds ratio [OR] = 0.39, P = 0.04), CMV mismatch (OR = 15.7, P < 0.001), and donor age (OR = 1.05, P = 0.009) were significantly associated with CMV infection.

CONCLUSIONS

CMV mismatch may have increased the risk of CMV infection after lung transplantation, which decreased after prophylaxis. In addition to CMV mismatch, low preoperative albumin level and donor age were independent predictors of CMV infection.

Cost-effectiveness of maribavir versus conventional antiviral therapies for post-transplant refractory cytomegalovirus infection with or without genotypic resistance: A US perspective

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of maribavir versus investigator-assigned therapy (IAT; valganciclovir/ganciclovir, foscarnet, or cidofovir) for post-transplant refractory cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection with or without resistance. A two-stage Markov model was designed using data from the SOLSTICE trial (NCT02931539), real-world multinational observational studies, and published literature. Stage 1 (0-78 weeks) comprised clinically significant CMV (csCMV), non-clinically significant CMV (n-csCMV), and dead states; stage 2 (78 weeks-lifetime) comprised alive and dead states. Total costs (2022 USD) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated for the maribavir and IAT cohorts. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated to determine cost-effectiveness against a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000/QALY. Compared with IAT, maribavir had lower costs ($139 751 vs $147 949) and greater QALYs (6.04 vs 5.83), making it cost-saving and more cost-effective. Maribavir had higher acquisition costs compared with IAT ($80 531 vs $65 285), but lower costs associated with administration/monitoring ($16 493 vs $27 563), adverse events (AEs) ($11 055 vs $16 114), hospitalization ($27 157 vs $33 905), and graft loss ($4516 vs $5081), thus making treatment with maribavir cost-saving. Maribavir-treated patients spent more time without CMV compared with IAT-treated patients (0.85 years vs 0.68 years), leading to lower retreatment costs for maribavir (cost savings: -$42 970.80). Compared with IAT, maribavir was more cost-effective for transplant recipients with refractory CMV, owing to better clinical efficacy and avoidance of high costs associated with administration, monitoring, AEs, and hospitalizations. These results can inform healthcare decision-makers on the most effective use of their resources for post-transplant refractory CMV treatment.

Advances in pharmacotherapies for cytomegalovirus infection: what is the current state of play?

INTRODUCTION

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) remains a serious opportunistic infection in hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) and solid-organ transplant (SOT) recipients. Traditional anti-CMV drugs are limited by toxicities and the development of resistance. Letermovir and maribavir are newly approved antivirals for the prevention and treatment of CMV.

AREAS COVERED

Prior reviews have discussed use of letermovir for prevention of CMV after HCT and maribavir for resistant or refractory (R/R) CMV post HCT or SOT. Subsequent data have expanded their use including letermovir for primary CMV prophylaxis in high-risk renal transplant recipients and new recommendations for extending prophylaxis through day + 200 in certain HCT patients. Data on the use of maribavir for first asymptomatic CMV infection post-HCT has also been published. This review compares the pharmacology of anti-CMV agents and discusses the updated literature of these new drugs in the prevention and treatment of CMV.

EXPERT OPINION

Letermovir and maribavir are much needed tools that spare toxicities of ganciclovir, foscarnet, and cidofovir. High cost is a challenge preventing their integration into clinical practice in resource-limited countries. Transplant centers need to exercise restraint in overuse to avoid resistance, particularly in the setting of high viral loads.

Cytomegalovirus related hospitalization costs among hematopoietic stem cell and solid organ transplant recipients treated with maribavir versus investigator-assigned therapy: A US-based study

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections among hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) and solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients impose a significant health care resource utilization (HCRU)-related economic burden. Maribavir (MBV), a novel anti-viral therapy (AVT), approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for post-transplant CMV infections refractory (with/without resistance) to conventional AVTs has demonstrated lower hospital length of stay (LOS) versus investigator-assigned therapy (IAT; valgancilovir, ganciclovir, foscarnet, or cidofovir) in a phase 3 trial (SOLSTICE). This study estimated the HCRU costs of MBV versus IAT.

METHODS

An economic model was developed to estimate HCRU costs for patients treated with MBV or IAT. Mean per-patient-per-year (PPPY) HCRU costs were calculated using (i) annualized mean hospital LOS in SOLSTICE, and (ii) CMV-related direct costs from published literature. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis with Monte-Carlo simulations assessed model robustness.

RESULTS

Of 352 randomized patients receiving MBV (n = 235) or IAT (n = 117) for 8 weeks in SOLSTICE, 40% had HSCT and 60% had SOT. Mean overall PPPY HCRU costs of overall hospital-LOS were $67,205 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $33,767, $231,275) versus $145,501 (95% CI: $62,064, $589,505) for MBV and IAT groups, respectively. Mean PPPY ICU and non-ICU stay costs were: $32,231 (95% CI: $5,248, $184,524) versus $45,307 (95% CI: $3,957, $481,740) for MBV and IAT groups, and $82,237 (95% CI: $40,397, $156,945) MBV versus $228,329 (95% CI: $94,442, $517,476) for MBV and IAT groups, respectively. MBV demonstrated cost savings in over 99.99% of simulations.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis suggests that Mean PPPY HCRU costs were 29%-64% lower with MBV versus other-AVTs.

Prevention of Cytomegalovirus Infection in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: Guidelines by the Korean Society of Infectious Diseases and the Korean Society for Transplantation

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is the most important opportunistic viral pathogen in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. The Korean guideline for the prevention of CMV infection in SOT recipients was developed jointly by the Korean Society for Infectious Diseases and the Korean Society of Transplantation. CMV serostatus of both donors and recipients should be screened before transplantation to best assess the risk of CMV infection after SOT. Seronegative recipients receiving organs from seropositive donors face the highest risk, followed by seropositive recipients. Either antiviral prophylaxis or preemptive therapy can be used to prevent CMV infection. While both strategies have been demonstrated to prevent CMV infection post-transplant, each has its own advantages and disadvantages. CMV serostatus, transplant organ, other risk factors, and practical issues should be considered for the selection of preventive measures. There is no universal viral load threshold to guide treatment in preemptive therapy. Each institution should define and validate its own threshold. Valganciclovir is the favored agent for both prophylaxis and preemptive therapy. The evaluation of CMV-specific cell-mediated immunity and the monitoring of viral load kinetics are gaining interest, but there was insufficient evidence to issue recommendations. Specific considerations on pediatric transplant recipients are included.

Immune-checkpoint expression in antigen-presenting cells (APCs) of cytomegaloviruses infection after transplantation: as a diagnostic biomarker

Cytomegalovirus (CMV), a member of the Herpesviridae family, mostly causes only slight feverish symptoms or can be asymptomatic in immunocompetent individuals. However, it is known to be particularly a significant cause of morbidity in immunocompromised patients, including transplant recipients, whose immune system has been weakened due to the consumption of immunosuppressor drugs. Therefore, the diagnosis of CMV infection after transplantation is crucial. New diagnostic methods for the quick detection of CMV have been developed as a result of understanding the clinical importance of invasive CMV. Antigen-presenting cells (APCs) and T cells are important components of the immune system and it may be possible to diagnose viral infections using immunological markers, such as lymphocytosis, cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTL), and serum cytokine levels. Moreover, PD-1, CTLA 4, and TIGIT, which are expressed on certain T cells and antigen-presenting cells, are over-expressed during the infection. The assessment of CMV infection based on T cell and APC activity, and the expression of immunological checkpoints, can be helpful for the diagnosis of transplant patients at risk for CMV infection. In this review, we will investigate how immune checkpoints affect immune cells and how they impair organ transplantation after CMV infection.

Healthcare resource utilization of maribavir versus investigator-assigned therapy in transplant recipients with cytomegalovirus infection refractory (with or without genotypic resistance) to prior treatment: Exploratory analysis of the Phase 3 SOLSTICE trial

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV), a common post-transplant infection, is associated with increased healthcare resource utilization. In the Phase 3 SOLSTICE trial, maribavir was superior to investigator-assigned therapy (IAT; valganciclovir/ganciclovir, foscarnet, and cidofovir) for CMV viremia clearance at Week 8 in transplant recipients with confirmed refractory CMV infection with/without resistance. This exploratory analysis evaluated hospital admissions of patients during the SOLSTICE trial.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to maribavir (400 mg twice daily) or IAT for an 8-week treatment phase with a 12-week follow-up. After ≥3 weeks of treatment, patients on IAT who met pre-specified criteria could enter a maribavir rescue arm (8-week maribavir treatment, 12-week follow-up). Adjusted hospitalization rates and length of hospital stay (LOS) were estimated using negative binomial models adjusting for the time in the relevant study phase. Subgroup analysis for the maribavir rescue arm was conducted.

RESULTS

Overall, 352 patients were randomized (maribavir: 235; IAT: 117); 22 entered the maribavir rescue arm. After adjusting for treatment exposure, patients on maribavir had a 34.8% reduction in hospitalization rate and 53.8% reduced LOS (days/person/year) versus IAT during the treatment phase. No significant differences between treatments were observed during the follow-up phase, although in both arms, hospitalization rates were lower than in the treatment phase. In the maribavir rescue arm, hospitalizations were 60.6% lower on/after maribavir rescue versus pre-rescue treatment (p = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

In patients requiring post-transplant CMV treatment, hospitalization rate and LOS were lower for maribavir than IAT, and hospitalization rates were lower on/after maribavir rescue than pre-rescue. Reducing hospitalizations can alleviate the burden on patients and healthcare systems.

CD16+ natural killer cells in bronchoalveolar lavage are associated with antibody-mediated rejection and chronic lung allograft dysfunction

Acute and chronic rejections limit the long-term survival after lung transplant. Pulmonary antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) is an incompletely understood driver of long-term outcomes characterized by donor-specific antibodies (DSAs), innate immune infiltration, and evidence of complement activation. Natural killer (NK) cells may recognize DSAs via the CD16 receptor, but this complement-independent mechanism of injury has not been explored in pulmonary AMR. CD16⁺ NK cells were quantified in 508 prospectively collected bronchoalveolar lavage fluid samples from 195 lung transplant recipients. Associations between CD16⁺ NK cells and human leukocyte antigen mismatches, DSAs, and AMR grade were assessed by linear models adjusted for participant characteristics and repeat measures. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess CD16⁺ NK cell association with chronic lung allograft dysfunction and survival. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid CD16⁺ NK cell frequency was associated with increasing human leukocyte antigens mismatches and increased AMR grade. Although NK frequencies were similar between DSA+ and DSA- recipients, CD16⁺ NK cell frequencies were greater in recipients with AMR and those with concomitant allograft dysfunction. CD16⁺ NK cells were associated with long-term graft dysfunction after AMR and decreased chronic lung allograft dysfunction-free survival. These data support the role of CD16⁺ NK cells in pulmonary AMR.

New Perspectives on Antimicrobial Agents: Maribavir

Maribavir was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in November 2021 for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients with post-transplant cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection/disease that is refractory to treatment (with or without genotypic resistance) with ganciclovir, valganciclovir, cidofovir, or foscarnet. Maribavir is an oral benzimidazole riboside with potent and selective multimodal anti-CMV activity. It utilizes a novel mechanism of action which confers activity against CMV strains that are resistant to traditional anti-CMV agents, and also offers a more favorable safety profile relative to the dose-limiting side effects of previously available therapies. Maribavir was initially studied as an agent for CMV prophylaxis in solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell recipients, but initial phase III trials failed to meet clinical efficacy endpoints. It has been more recently studied as a therapeutic agent at higher doses for refractory-resistant (R-R) CMV infections with favorable outcomes. After an overview of maribavir's chemistry and clinical pharmacology, this review will summarize clinical efficacy, safety, tolerability, and resistance data associated with maribavir therapy.

Laboratory diagnostic testing for cytomegalovirus infection in solid organ transplant patients

Human cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection, which is one of the most common complications in transplant recipients, increases the risk of graft loss and rejection. Laboratory strategies for diagnosing CMV infection rely on the measurement of viral DNAemia and CMV-specific cell-mediated immunity (CMV-CMI). The CMV quantitative nucleic acid amplification test (QNAT) enabled the spread of preemptive therapy and prompted recommendations for surveillance, diagnosis, and monitoring. Despite the implementation of the World Health Organization international standard for calibration, variability of QNAT persists due to technical issues. CMV immunoglobulin G serology is the standard method for CMV immune screening of transplant candidates and donors. Assays for CMV-CMI play an important role in helping to predict the risk and to develop an individualized CMV management plan. Genotypic testing for resistance is needed when drug-resistant CMV infection is suspected. Here, we review the state of the art of laboratory tests for CMV infection in solid organ transplantation.

Whole Genome Profiling of Lung Microbiome in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients Reveals Virus Involved Microecology May Worsen Prognosis

Solid organ transplantation (SOT) is the final therapeutic option for recipients with end-stage organ failure, and its long-term success is limited by infections and chronic allograft dysfunction. Viral infection in SOT recipients is considered an important factor affecting prognosis. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed 43 cases of respiratory infections in SOT recipients using metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) for bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF). At least one virus was detected in 26 (60.5%) recipients, while 17 (39.5%) were virus-negative. Among virus-positive recipients, cytomegalovirus (CMV) was detected in 14 (32.6%), Torque teno virus (TTV) was detected in 9 (20.9%), and other viruses were detected in 6 (14.0%). Prognostic analysis showed that the mortality of the virus-positive group was higher than that of the virus-negative group regardless whether it is the main cause of infection. Analysis of different types of viruses showed that the mortality of the CMV-positive group was significantly higher than that of the CMV-negative group, but no significant difference was observed in other type of virus groups. The diversity analysis of the lung microbiome showed that there was a significant difference between the virus-positive group and the negative group, in particular, the significant differences in microorganisms such as Pneumocystis jirovecii (PJP) and Moraxella osloensiswere detected. Moreover, in the presence of CMV, Pneumocystis jirovecii, Veillonella parvula, and other species showed dramatic changes in the lung of SOT patients, implying that high degree of co-infection between CMV and Pneumocystis jirovecii may occur. Taken together, our study shows that the presence of virus is associated with worse prognosis and dramatically altered lung microbiota in SOT recipients.

Cytomegalovirus and other herpesviruses after hematopoietic cell and solid organ transplantation: From antiviral drugs to virus-specific T cells

Herpesviruses can either cause primary infection or may get reactivated after both hematopoietic cell and solid organ transplantations. In general, viral infections increase post-transplant morbidity and mortality. Prophylactic, preemptive, or therapeutically administered antiviral drugs may be associated with serious side effects and may induce viral resistance. Virus-specific T cells represent a valuable addition to antiviral treatment, with high rates of response and minimal side effects. Even low numbers of virus-specific T cells manufactured by direct selection methods can reconstitute virus-specific immunity after transplantation and control viral replication. Virus-specific T cells belong to the advanced therapy medicinal products, and their production is regulated by appropriate legislation; also, strict safety regulations are required to minimize their side effects.

Prevention of viral infections in solid organ transplant recipients in the era of COVID-19: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

In solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients, viral infections are associated with direct morbidity and mortality and may influence long-term allograft outcomes. Prevention of viral infections by vaccination, antiviral prophylaxis, and behavioral measures is therefore of paramount importance.

AREAS COVERED

We searched Pubmed to select publications to review current preventive strategies against the most important viral infections in SOT recipients, including SARS-CoV-2, influenza, CMV, and other herpesvirus, viral hepatitis, measles, mumps, rubella, and BK virus.

EXPERT OPINION

The clinical significance of the reduced humoral response following mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in SOT recipients still needs to be better clarified, in particular with regard to the vaccines' efficacy in preventing severe disease. Although a third dose improves immunogenicity and is already integrated into routine practice in several countries, further research is still needed to explore additional interventions. In the upcoming years, further data are expected to better delineate the role of virus-specific cell mediated immune monitoring for the prevention of CMV and potentially other viral diseases, and the role of the letermovir in the prevention of CMV in SOT recipients. Future studies including clinical endpoints will hopefully facilitate the integration of successful new influenza vaccination strategies into clinical practice.

Cytomegalovirus prevention in thoracic organ transplantation: A single-center evaluation of letermovir prophylaxis

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is common following thoracic organ transplantation and causes substantial morbidity and mortality. Letermovir is a novel antiviral agent used off-label in this population for CMV prevention. Our goal was to understand patterns of letermovir use and effectiveness when applied for CMV prophylaxis after thoracic transplantation.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated letermovir use among thoracic transplant recipients at an academic transplant center who initiated letermovir from January 2018 to October2019 for CMV prophylaxis. We analyzed indication, timing, and duration of prophylaxis; tolerability; and occurrence of breakthrough CMV DNAemia and disease.

RESULTS

Forty-two episodes of letermovir prophylaxis occurred in 41 patients, including 37 lung and 4 heart transplant recipients. Primary prophylaxis (26/42, 61.9%) was utilized mainly due to myelosuppression (25/26, 96.2%) and was initiated a median of 315 days post-transplant (interquartile range [IQR] 125-1139 days). Sixteen episodes of secondary prophylaxis (16/42, 38.1%) were initiated a median of 695 days post-transplant (IQR 537-1156 days) due to myelosuppression (10/16, 62.5%) or prior CMV resistance (6/16, 37.5%). Median duration of letermovir prophylaxis was 282 days (IQR 131-433 days). Adverse effects required letermovir cessation in 5/42 (11.9%) episodes. Only one episode (2.4%) was complicated by clinically significant breakthrough CMV infection. Transient low-level CMV DNAemia (<450 IU/ml) occurred in 15 episodes (35.7%) but did not require letermovir cessation.

CONCLUSIONS

Letermovir was well tolerated and effective during extended prophylactic courses with only one case of breakthrough CMV infection in this cohort of thoracic transplant recipients. Further prospective trials of letermovir prophylaxis in this population are warranted.

Maribavir for Refractory Cytomegalovirus Infections With or Without Resistance Post-Transplant: Results From a Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Therapies for refractory cytomegalovirus infections (with or without resistance [R/R]) in transplant recipients are limited by toxicities. Maribavir has multimodal anti-cytomegalovirus activity through the inhibition of UL97 protein kinase.

METHODS

In this phase 3, open-label study, hematopoietic-cell and solid-organ transplant recipients with R/R cytomegalovirus were randomized 2:1 to maribavir 400 mg twice daily or investigator-assigned therapy (IAT; valganciclovir/ganciclovir, foscarnet, or cidofovir) for 8 weeks, with 12 weeks of follow-up. The primary endpoint was confirmed cytomegalovirus clearance at end of week 8. The key secondary endpoint was achievement of cytomegalovirus clearance and symptom control at end of week 8, maintained through week 16.

RESULTS

352 patients were randomized (235 maribavir; 117 IAT). Significantly more patients in the maribavir versus IAT group achieved the primary endpoint (55.7% vs 23.9%; adjusted difference [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 32.8% [22.80-42.74]; P < .001) and key secondary endpoint (18.7% vs 10.3%; adjusted difference [95% CI]: 9.5% [2.02-16.88]; P = .01). Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were similar between groups (maribavir, 97.4%; IAT, 91.4%). Maribavir was associated with less acute kidney injury versus foscarnet (8.5% vs 21.3%) and neutropenia versus valganciclovir/ganciclovir (9.4% vs 33.9%). Fewer patients discontinued treatment due to TEAEs with maribavir (13.2%) than IAT (31.9%). One patient per group had fatal treatment-related TEAEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Maribavir was superior to IAT for cytomegalovirus viremia clearance and viremia clearance plus symptom control maintained post-therapy in transplant recipients with R/R cytomegalovirus. Maribavir had fewer treatment discontinuations due to TEAEs than IAT. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT02931539 (SOLSTICE).

Influence of Cytomegalovirus on the Survival of Cytomegalovirus-Seropositive Lung Transplant

BACKGROUND

The primary aim of this study was to analyze the survival of patients undergoing lung transplant (LT) with cytomegalovirus (CMV)-positive serologies at the time of transplantation, according to the presence of CMV events and according to the severity of these events. The secondary objective was to assess whether there are differences in the incidence of chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) according to the presence of these events.

METHODS

This was an observational, single-center, retrospective study. The inclusion criterion for the study was having undergone LT at the Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre from October 2008 to February 2019. Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. The incidence of CLAD was compared using the χ² test.

RESULTS

Inclusion criteria were met by 239 LTs. In terms of survival, no difference was found between patients with and without CMV events (log-rank P = .52), with mean survival of 3223 ± 164 days and 3024 ± 146 days, respectively. Nor did we find a difference when stratifying patients according to no CMV events, infection, syndrome, and disease (log-rank P = .6). There was also no difference in the incidence of CLAD between patients with and without CMV events (P > .178).

CONCLUSION

In patients with positive CMV serology, the development of CMV events, including severe disease, does not seem to influence survival. The incidence of CLAD also is not increased by the presence of CMV events.

Infections in Lung Transplant Recipients during and after Prophylaxis

Background

The timeline of infections after lung transplantation has been changed with the introduction of new immunosuppressants and prophylaxis strategies. The study aimed to investigate the epidemiological characteristics of infectious diseases after lung transplantation in the current era.

Materials and Methods

All patients who underwent lung or heart–lung transplantation at our institution between October 29, 2008 and April 3, 2019 were enrolled. We retrospectively reviewed the patients' medical records till April 2, 2020.

Results

In total, 100 consecutive lung transplant recipients were enrolled. The median follow-up period was 28 months after lung transplantation. A total of 127 post–lung transplantation bacterial infections occurred. Catheter-related bloodstream infection (25/84, 29.8%) was the most common within 6 months and pneumonia (23/43, 53.5%) was the most common after 6 months. Most episodes (35/40, 87.5%) of respiratory viral infections occurred after 6 months, mainly as upper respiratory infections. The remaining episodes (5/40, 12.5%) mostly manifested as lower respiratory tract infections. Seventy cytomegalovirus infections observed in 43 patients were divided into 23 episodes occurring before and 47 episodes occurring after discontinuing prophylaxis. Of 10 episodes of cytomegalovirus disease, four occurred during prophylaxis and six occurred after prophylaxis. Of 23 episodes of post–lung transplantation fungal infection, 7 were aspergillosis and all occurred after the discontinuation of prophylaxis.

Conclusion

Lung transplant recipients experienced a high burden of infection even after 6 months, especially after the end of the prophylaxis period. Therefore, these patients should be continued to be monitored long-term for infectious disease.

Cytomegalovirus infection after liver transplantation

Human cytomegalovirus (CMV) represents the most common opportunistic infection in liver transplant recipients. CMV infections in post liver transplant patients cause significant morbidity and mortality, directly affecting post-transplant outcomes. This review will provide the framework for the surveillance, diagnosis, prophylaxis and treatment of CMV in the liver transplant population.

Impact of normothermic ex vivo lung perfusion on early post-transplantation cytomegalovirus infection

Background

The low acceptance rates in lung transplantation underline the importance to use every potential transplantable organ. With the use of normothermic ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) there is a potential to use more donor lungs for transplantation. Aim of this study was to evaluate if EVLP has an effect on cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection after lung transplantation.

Methods

Between May 2016 and October 2018, 57 lung transplants were performed. Out of these 21 extended criteria lungs were evaluated by EVLP and 16 transplanted. In a retrospective study, results of EVLP treated lungs were compared with lungs after cold storage preservation (CSP). Donor/recipient CMV IgG status and seroconversion rate was examined.

Results

Donors were CMV IgG+ in EVLP 69% and CSP 61% (n.s.). Best pO₂ on procurement at FiO₂ 1.0 was in EVLP 278±76 versus CSP 413±96 mmHg (P≤0.05). Recipients were CMV IgG+ in EVLP 38% and CSP 63% (P<0.07). CMV seroconversion: EVLP 12%, CSP 20% (P<0.05), in the CSP group in 5% recipients with more than 1,000 copies/mL were diagnosed by PCR and treated for CMV infection. Procalcitonin (PCT) levels from day 1 to day 5 were significantly lower for CSP group (P<0.05). 30-day mortality was 12% for EVLP recipients.

Conclusions

Normothermic EVLP did not influence CMV infection rate, however early PCT levels were higher in EVLP group. Short-term results were comparable to standard lung transplantation.

Cytomegalovirus Infection in Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation: State of the Evidence

This review focuses on recent advances in the field of cytomegalovirus (CMV). The 2 main strategies for CMV prevention are prophylaxis and preemptive therapy. Prophylaxis effectively prevents CMV infection after solid organ transplantation (SOT) but is associated with high rates of neutropenia and delayed-onset postprophylaxis disease. In contrast, preemptive therapy has the advantage of leading to lower rates of CMV disease and robust humoral and T-cell responses. It is widely used in hematopoietic cell transplant recipients but is infrequently utilized after SOT due to logistical considerations, though these may be overcome by novel methods to monitor CMV viremia using self-testing platforms. We review recent developments in CMV immune monitoring, vaccination, and monoclonal antibodies, all of which have the potential to become part of integrated strategies that rely on viral load monitoring and immune responses. We discuss novel therapeutic options for drug-resistant or refractory CMV infection, including maribavir, letermovir, and adoptive T-cell transfer. We also explore the role of donor factors in transmitting CMV after SOT. Finally, we propose a framework with which to approach CMV prevention in the foreseeable future.

Expression pattern of co-inhibitory molecules on CMV-specific T-cells in lung transplant patients

OBJECTIVES

Cytomegalovirus infection (CMVi) occurs frequently in transplant patients. Co-inhibitory molecules on CMV-specific T-cells (TCMV) in patients after lung transplantation were investigated.

METHODS

59 lung transplant patients were stratified according to anti-CMV serostatus at time of transplantation. The co-inhibitors Programmed-Death-Receptor-1 (PD1) and B-and-T-Lymphocyte-Attenuator (BTLA) were detected on TCMV by flow cytometry (FACS).

RESULTS

TCMV were detectable in CMV sero-positive patients (R+) and in CMV sero-negative patients with a lung graft of a CMV sero-positive donor (D+/R-); in both cases, the frequency of TCMV was higher than in healthy controls (HC). PD-1 on TCMV was increased in D+/R+ and D+/R- patients as compared to HC. BTLA was significantly enhanced on TCMV of D+/R- patients vs. HC. R+ patients with CMV reactivation in the past had an increased fraction of BTLA+ TCMV.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the expression pattern of co-inhibitory molecules on TCMV is altered in patients after lung transplantation.

New Developments in the Management of Cytomegalovirus Infection After Transplantation

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) continues to be one of the most important pathogens that universally affect solid organ and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. Lack of effective CMV-specific immunity is the common factor that predisposes to the risk of CMV reactivation and clinical disease after transplantation. Antiviral drugs are the cornerstone for prevention and treatment of CMV infection and disease. Over the years, the CMV DNA polymerase inhibitor, ganciclovir (and valganciclovir), have served as the backbone for management, while foscarnet and cidofovir are reserved for the management of CMV infection that is refractory or resistant to ganciclovir treatment. In this review, we highlight the role of the newly approved drug, letermovir, a viral terminase inhibitor, for CMV prevention after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Advances in immunologic monitoring may allow for an individualized approach to management of CMV after transplantation. Specifically, the potential role of CMV-specific T-cell measurements in guiding the need for the treatment of asymptomatic CMV infection and the duration of treatment of CMV disease is discussed. The role of adoptive immunotherapy, using ex vivo-generated CMV-specific T cells, is highlighted. This article provides a review of novel drugs, tests, and strategies in optimizing our current approaches to prevention and treatment of CMV in transplant recipients.

High incidence of clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection in CMV D+/R+ lung transplant recipients receiving 3 months of antiviral prophylaxis

BACKGROUND

Universal antiviral prophylaxis is the preferred preventive strategy for lung transplant recipients (LTRs) at risk of CMV infection. We compared the risk of CMV infection between CMV D+/R + and D-/R + LTRs after 3 months of prophylaxis.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of CMV R + LTRs transplanted between 2005 and 2013. Patients dying before completing 3 months, or receiving >180 days of prophylaxis were excluded. The primary outcome was proportion of LTRs who developed CMV infection and clinically significant CMV infection defined as CMV infection leading to preemptive therapy or CMV disease.

RESULTS

We analyzed 90 D+/R + and 72 D-/R + with a median follow up of 730 days. CMV infection and disease was more common in D+/R + compared to D-/R+ (CMV infection 66% vs 40%; P = 0.001; CMV disease 13% vs 4% P = 0.045). Fifty-nine patients developed at least one episode of clinically significant CMV infection (41/90 [46%] D+/R + and 18/72 [25%] D-/R + P=0.007) with recurrence occurring in 29 LTRs (49% of patients with previous CMV infection), of which 22 (76%) were CMV D+/R+. Thirty percent had side effects related to CMV therapy.

CONCLUSION

Three months prophylaxis in D+/R + LTRs was associated with high rates of clinically significant CMV infection and recurrences.

Cytomegalovirus in solid organ transplant recipients-Guidelines of the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Diseases Community of Practice

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is one of the most common opportunistic infections that affect the outcome of solid organ transplantation. This updated guideline from the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Diseases Community of Practice provides evidence-based and expert recommendations for screening, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of CMV in solid organ transplant recipients. CMV serology to detect immunoglobulin G remains as the standard method for pretransplant screening of donors and transplant candidates. Antiviral prophylaxis and preemptive therapy are the mainstays of CMV prevention. The lack of a widely applicable viral load threshold for diagnosis and preemptive therapy is highlighted, as a result of variability of CMV nucleic acid testing, even in the contemporary era when calibrators are standardized. Valganciclovir and intravenous ganciclovir remain as drugs of choice for CMV management. Strategies for managing drug-resistant CMV infection are presented. There is an increasing use of CMV-specific cell-mediated immune assays to stratify the risk of CMV infection after solid organ transplantation, but their role in optimizing CMV prevention and treatment efforts has yet to be demonstrated. Specific issues related to pediatric transplant recipients are discussed.

Cytomegalovirus viremia in lung transplantation during and after prophylaxis

BACKGROUND

Lung transplantation has a high risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) viremia and disease.

METHODS

Valganciclovir was planned for 6 months in CMV recipient seropositive (R+) lung transplants (LTs) and given long-term in D+R- LTs. CMV viremia was monitored regularly during and after prophylaxis in all patients.

RESULTS

Of 137 LTs, 22 were D+R-, 49 D+R+, 43 D-R+, and 23 D-R-, with median follow up 4.1 years (IQR 2.1-6.2 years). CMV viremia at any time occurred in 44.5% of LTs. CMV viral load >10³  c/mL was uncommon (9/77 episodes). CMV viremia occurred at median 665 days (IQR 271-1411 days), in 5.1% LTs <6 months, 20.3% LTs 6-12 months, and 35.8% LTs >12 months. CMV disease occurred in 6 (4.4%) LTs at an overall rate of 1.0 episode per 100 person-years: two of these cases were organ-specific disease, four were CMV syndrome. One case of ganciclovir-resistant CMV was diagnosed. D+R+ and D+R- LTs had higher viremia rates than the D-R+ group. No viremia occurred in D-R- LTs. CMV viremia was not associated with age, gender, type of LT, indication for LT, acute rejection, bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome, or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis for 6 months in D+R+ and D-R+, and past 12 months in D+R- LTs, with long-term monitoring in all patients using a sensitive assay, and reinstitution of valganciclovir for low-level viremia was effective at markedly reducing the incidence of CMV disease. CMV D-R- LTs do not need routine CMV monitoring.

The Third International Consensus Guidelines on the Management of Cytomegalovirus in Solid-organ Transplantation

Despite recent advances, cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections remain one of the most common complications affecting solid organ transplant recipients, conveying higher risks of complications, graft loss, morbidity, and mortality. Research in the field and development of prior consensus guidelines supported by The Transplantation Society has allowed a more standardized approach to CMV management. An international multidisciplinary panel of experts was convened to expand and revise evidence and expert opinion-based consensus guidelines on CMV management including prevention, treatment, diagnostics, immunology, drug resistance, and pediatric issues. Highlights include advances in molecular and immunologic diagnostics, improved understanding of diagnostic thresholds, optimized methods of prevention, advances in the use of novel antiviral therapies and certain immunosuppressive agents, and more savvy approaches to treatment resistant/refractory disease. The following report summarizes the updated recommendations.

New therapies for human cytomegalovirus infections

The recent approval of letermovir marks a new era of therapy for human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) infections, particularly for the prevention of HCMV disease in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. For almost 30 years ganciclovir has been the therapy of choice for these infections and by today's standards this drug exhibits only modest antiviral activity that is often insufficient to completely suppress viral replication, and drives the selection of drug-resistant variants that continue to replicate and contribute to disease. While ganciclovir remains the therapy of choice, additional drugs that inhibit novel molecular targets, such as letermovir, will be required as highly effective combination therapies are developed not only for the treatment of immunocompromised hosts, but also for congenitally infected infants. Sustained efforts, largely in the biotech industry and academia, have identified additional highly active lead compounds that have progressed into clinical studies with varying levels of success and at least two have the potential to be approved in the near future. Some of the new drugs in the pipeline inhibit new molecular targets, remain effective against isolates that have developed resistance to existing therapies, and promise to augment existing therapeutic regimens. Here, we will describe some of the unique features of HCMV biology and discuss their effect on therapeutic needs. Existing drugs will also be discussed and some of the more promising candidates will be reviewed with an emphasis on those progressing through clinical studies. The in vitro and in vivo antiviral activity, spectrum of antiviral activity, and mechanism of action of new compounds will be reviewed to provide an update on potential new therapies for HCMV infections that have progressed significantly in recent years.

Impact of donor and recipient cytomegalovirus serology on long-term survival of lung transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Pre-transplant cytomegalovirus (CMV) serostatus has been associated with lung transplant patient survival. We retrospectively analyzed the relationship between pre-transplant donor/recipient CMV serostatus and long-term mortality in a cohort of lung transplant recipients at our center.

METHOD

Adult (Age >17 years) lung recipients transplanted between July 1985-December 2015 were analyzed. Variables included age, sex, pre-transplant donor (D)/recipient (R) serostatus [D-/R-, D-/R+, D+/R+, D+/R-], CMV infection within 2 years of transplant and transplant eras divided by changes in CMV prevention strategies: Era 1 (pre-ganciclovir, July 1985-April 1998), Era 2 (oral ganciclovir, May 1998-December 2004), Era 3 (valganciclovir, January 2005-December 2015). Survival analysis and Cox regression were performed at 10 years.

RESULTS

A total of 652 lung recipients were analyzed. Twenty percent were CMV mismatched pre-transplant and 45% had CMV infection within 2 years post-transplant. Survival at 10 years appeared worse in D+ transplants (P = 0.027). D-/R- lungs did not have significantly different survival across eras (P = 0.76), but survival of D-/R+, D+/R+, D+/R- lungs improved (P < 0.001). Cox regression revealed that transplantation in the valganciclovir era reduced risk of death in lung transplants by an estimated 52% (P < 0.001) compared to transplantation in the pre-ganciclovir era after controlling for age at transplant, D/R CMV serostatus and CMV infection. Age at transplant and CMV infection were also significant predictors of mortality in lung transplants (P < 0.001 and 0.033 respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our review of the impact of CMV managed differently across eras suggests in lung transplantation there is no independent influence of D/R CMV serostatus on 10-year survival.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Disease Despite Weekly Preemptive CMV Strategy for Recipients of Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Background

Transplant recipients presenting with cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease at the time of diagnosis of CMV DNAemia pose a challenge to a preemptive CMV management strategy. However, the rate and risk factors of such failure remain uncertain.

Methods

Solid organ transplantation (SOT) and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients with a first episode of CMV polymerase chain reaction (PCR) DNAemia within the first year posttransplantation were evaluated (n = 335). Patient records were reviewed for presence of CMV disease at the time of CMV DNAemia diagnosis. The distribution and prevalence of CMV disease were estimated, and the odds ratio (OR) of CMV disease was modeled using logistic regression.

Results

The prevalence of CMV disease increased for both SOT and HSCT with increasing diagnostic CMV PCR load and with screening intervals >14 days. The only independent risk factor in multivariate analysis was increasing CMV DNAemia load of the diagnostic CMV PCR (OR = 6.16; 95% confidence interval, 2.09–18.11). Among recipients receiving weekly screening (n = 147), 16 (10.8%) had CMV disease at the time of diagnosis of CMV DNAemia (median DNAemia load 628 IU/mL; interquartile range, 432–1274); 93.8% of these cases were HSCT and lung transplant recipients.

Conclusions

Despite application of weekly screening intervals, HSCT and lung transplant recipients in particular presented with CMV disease at the time of diagnosis of CMV DNAemia. Additional research to improve the management of patients at risk of presenting with CMV disease at low levels of CMV DNAemia and despite weekly screening is warranted.

Experience with leflunomide as treatment and as secondary prophylaxis for cytomegalovirus infection in lung transplant recipients: A case series and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Data concerning the use of leflunomide-a drug approved for rheumatoid arthritis with in vitro anticytomegalovirus (CMV) activity-in lung transplant (LT) recipients are scarce.

AIMS

To report the use of leflunomide in LT recipients diagnosed with CMV infection/disease.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed a single-center retrospective study including LT recipients who received leflunomide for CMV infection or as secondary prophylaxis after viremia clearance. We also conducted a full systematic PubMed search until June 30, 2017.

RESULTS

We identified 5 LT recipients in our center plus 7 patients reported in the literature. All patients had previously received ganciclovir (GCV) and foscarnet (FOS), with drug-induced adverse effects described in 6 recipients (50%). Antiviral resistance mutations were observed in 8 patients (66.7%). Leflunomide was prescribed for CMV infection in 9 of 12 patients (75%) and as secondary prophylaxis in 3 patients (25%). Initial decrease of CMV viremia after starting leflunomide was observed in 7 of 9 recipients (77.7%), although this response was only transient in 2 patients. Long-term suppression of CMV viremia was reported in 7 of 12 patients (58.3%). In 3 recipients (25%), leflunomide was discontinued due to adverse effects.

DISCUSSION

Our study has some limitations, such as the small number of patients included, its retrospective nature, and absence of leflunomide drug monitoring in serum. Notwithstanding, in our experience, leflunomide proved to be particularly effective as an anti-CMV secondary prophylaxis treatment and for clearing low-grade viremia. Moreover, leflunomide combined with a short course of GCV or intravitreal FOS also proved to be very effective in some patients.

CONCLUSION

Leflunomide, alone or in combination, could be an effective treatment in selected LT recipients with GCV-resistant CMV infection and as secondary prophylaxis. Further studies are necessary.

Cytomegalovirus infection in lung transplant recipients

INTRODUCTION

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in solid organ transplant (SOT) patients. Lung transplant recipients are particularly at risk given the intense immunosuppression required. Areas covered: The Detailed review of the literature related to CMV infection, its direct and indirect effect on lung allograft function, as well as diagnosis, immune monitoring, treatment options and prevention strategies. Expert commentary: In lung transplant recipients, CMV infection is associated with pro-inflammatory and immune inhibitory effects that increase the risk of graft dysfunction and loss. Diagnosis of CMV infection remains challenging. Treatment options remain relatively limited.